1935144 (Refugee)

The applicants, citizens of China, sought review of a decision affirming the refusal of their protection visa applications. The dispute centred on whether they would face persecution or significant harm upon return to China, based on claims of the primary applicant's father being targeted for exposing corruption and the applicants' alleged membership in an underground Christian church. The case was heard by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The Tribunal was required to determine if the applicants met the criteria for a protection visa under section 36(2) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), specifically whether they would face persecution due to imputed political opinion or religion, or if there were substantial grounds to believe they would suffer significant harm as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal to China. This involved assessing the credibility and sufficiency of the evidence presented regarding the alleged persecution of the primary applicant's father and the applicants' religious activities.

The Tribunal found that the applicants had not discharged their onus to provide sufficient evidence to establish their claims. While accepting the applicants' basic biographical information and their status as Chinese citizens, the Tribunal noted the lack of corroborating evidence for the claims of the primary applicant's father's persecution and the applicants' involvement in an underground church. The Tribunal highlighted that the applicants had not provided further information or evidence to the Tribunal, despite requests from the original decision-maker. The Tribunal concluded that the applicants' claims regarding their father's persecution were vague and unclear in their relation to the applicants' fear of harm, and that the applicants had departed China lawfully on their own passports, suggesting they were not of significant interest to the authorities. Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision under review.